The house of cards is beginning to crumble on big pharma, their partner in crime, big media and, the so-called ‘skeptics’ that do their bidding on the entire Wakefield issue. The latest ‘exoneration’ SHOULD only build steam for the Wakefiled lawsuit. That is, if the Wakefield suit gets it’s day in court.
Editorial by Jenny McCarthy: MMR Doctor Exonerated—Who’s Guilty Now?
By Jenny McCarthy
March 16, 2012
The parent autism community is buzzing with excitement over a ruling by a British judge clearing Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s colleague and co-author of all charges against him that arose from a study of the relationship between gut disease, autism, and the MMR vaccine.
Judge John Mitting’s conclusion, from an appeal by the highly respected pediatric gastroenterologist Prof. John Walker-Smith, stated:
“…both on general issues and the Lancet paper and in relation to individual children, the panel’s overall conclusion that Professor Walker-Smith was guilty of serious professional misconduct was flawed…The panel’s determination cannot stand. I therefore quash it.”
Professor Walker-Smith was Andrew Wakefield’s co-author on a highly controversial study published in the medical journal The Lancet in 1998. Most of the controversy stemmed from the reporting by the co-authors that many of the parents in the study claimed that their children regressed into autism after receiving the MMR vaccine.
For parents of children with autism, this whole mess has always been a bit of a head-scratcher. The Lancet study’s conclusion that children with autism suffer from bowel disease is something any autism parent could easily confirm, and MMR, by far, has been the vaccine most commonly cited by parents as a trigger for a regression into autism. In my travels, I have heard the same story from parents about MMR leading to regression thousands of times.
In Britain, The General Medical Council is in charge of licensing and regulating doctors. Their 2010 “trial” of Andrew Wakefield and his colleagues was the longest in GMC history, lasting 217 days, and concluded by revoking the medical licenses of Dr. Andrew Wakefield and Prof Walker-Smith. At the time, Dr. Wakefield spoke of the injustice that Judge Mitting has now confirmed:
“It seemed to me that they had come to this decision a long time ago, long before the evidence was fairly heard. This is the way the system deals with dissent. You isolate, discredit and provide an example to other doctors and scientists not to get involved in this kind of thing. That is examining questions of vaccine safety.”
Now what? If the foundation of the proof that the MMR does not trigger autism is crumbling, what in the world are parents supposed to believe? If Professor Walker-Smith is not guilty on all charges, will Dr. Wakefield be next? The Canary Party’s press release explains:
“While John Walker-Smith received funding to appeal the GMC decision from his insurance carrier, his co-author Andrew Wakefield did not — and was therefore unable to mount an appeal in the high court. This year, however, Dr. Wakefield, who now conducts his research in the US, has filed a defamation lawsuit against Brian Deer, Fiona Godlee and the British Medical Journal for falsely accusing him of ‘fraud.’ The suit is currently underway in Texas, where Wakefield now lives.”
I think I’m really happy today–it’s great to see justice finally served. At the same time, have parents been given false information? Are decisions being made by parents based on headlines that may prove inaccurate? Is it possible vaccines are in fact dangerous for our most fragile kids?
If Dr. Wakefield and Prof. Walker-Smith have been found not guilty, who are the guilty parties? Mark Blaxill, chairman of the Canary Party, offers up his thoughts:
“Though justice has finally prevailed for Prof. Walker-Smith, the damage done to him and his colleagues has been incalculable. The UK government must investigate the corruption in the GMC, which has severely damaged the reputations of good, honest doctors. Most of all, it’s outrageous that Dr. Andrew Wakefield has been vilified by government officials, vaccine manufacturers and physician organizations, and that the media has accepted these unfounded accusations uncritically.”
I don’t know the answers to all these questions. Unfortunately, the GMC’s decision to turn Dr. Wakefield and Prof. Walker-Smith’s paper into a three-ring circus has put a chill on research into all the possible environmental causes of autism. Will this finally open the floodgates?
We need answers, and we need them now. Millions of children remain at risk. For one day, at least, it feels like some justice has been served.
Dr. Wakefield will have his day in court, HOPEFULLY.
We all saw how the federal ‘courts’ in the Untied States handled Jessy Ventura’s lawsuit against the TSA. Jessy Ventura was NEVER GIVEN ONE DAY IN A COURT ROOM. Which is a huge violation of OUR rights in the US under the US constitution. YES!! The US federal courts violated ALL of our rights when Ventura’s right to a FAIR day in court was denied. Question begs to be asked… Will Dr. Andrew Wakefield get his day in court? Or, will the same judicial system that kept Ventura’s case out of court keep Wakefield’s case from EVER seeing a day in court as well?
The British Medical Journal (the media / medical industry)
Journalist Brian Deer (the media)
Dr. Fiona Godlee (medical industry / media)
What the Wakefield Lawsuit Means If The Suit Goes Through And Wakefield Wins:
I see this as a case MUCH BIGGER than Dr. Wakefiled himself.
If Dr. Wakefield wins it would be a huge blow to the main stream media that aided and abetted KNOWN FALSE accusations against Dr. Wakefield. The lawsuit would PROVE IN COURT that the actions of the defendants keeping FACTS from Dr. Wakefiled et al research relevant to the public’s health & safety PURPOSELY out of the public record by means of defaming Dr. Wakefield in the process would be A GROSS VIOLATION OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND TRUST. This, on top of ruining a professional career and a person’s individual well being in the process.
Facts From the Suit:
Click link below for copy of suit.
Brian Deer falsified data.
Defaming statements by both the BMJ and Brian Deer were based off of KNOWN falsified data. This is where Dr. Godlec aided and abetted these false alligations against Dr. Wakefild by publishing defaming articles to collaborate Deers false and CORRUPTED allegations.
Dr. Wakefield presents the ‘facts’ in the lawsuit provided in pdf form linked to in this article.
This is not a hard case for Dr. Wakefield et al to prove in the Texas court. The Texas court HAS jurisdiction over the defendants since their fraud WAS perpetuated not only in Texas BUT, all across America by the corporate media and the internet.
If Wakefield wins his lawsuit an investigation of a coverup needs to be done ASAP where another lawsuit can be field against the parties this fraud was covering up for.
I’ve been monitoring internet communication on the filing of this lawsuit by Dr. Wakefield. What I noticed was very PREDICTABLE.
Friends of the corporate established media and the pharmacological Medical Industrial Complex have come out in a firestorm trying to defend the ‘OFFICIAL LIE’ as they always do. In this case the lying of Brian Deer et al.
Who are these people? The core of the people ‘leading the charge’ are ‘self described’ skeptics. The problem is that they really are NOT ‘TRUE SKEPTICS’. A ‘true skeptic’ would be a skeptic of ALL sides of an issue. These so-called skeptic groups are lead by people who ALWAYS are one sidedly skeptical and, THAT SIDE ALWAYS TOWS THE CORPORATE / BIG GOVERNMENT LINE. Always, without fail!
That, by itself, should make ANY INDEPENDENT THINKER a skeptic of the skeptic movement itself. These so-called ‘skeptics’ either, NEVER present their ‘skepticism’ from a point of view that looks at ALL the evidence on BOTH SIDES or, they ONLY look at the ‘weakest’ argument and NOT all the others. They typically just defend the corporate / government ‘officaildom’ on one hand while going ‘ape’ being a skeptic on the opposite issue with NO BALANCE of skepticism what-so-ever.
There is plenty of valid documentation that both corporate and government entities employ a great number of ‘hacks’ out there on the internet to do their bidding for them in the court of public opinion and, it doesn’t really take a rocket scientist to figure out that the leaders of these so-called skeptic websites are nothing more than paid for hacks. Paid to tow the corporate / corporate-government line, and if you really understood ‘what it would mean if Wakefield wins his suit’ then, it’s easy to understand the all out attack on his lawsuit by these ‘hacks’ out here on the internet.